On 4/20/10 10:50 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:34:37AM +0200, Francisco Vila wrote:
>> Hello. I guess this means I have to upgrade my compiler or something.
>
> If anything, it would be makeinfo, not your compiler. But I think
> the problem is that I didn't update
Graham Percival writes:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 08:10:15AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>>
>> On 4/20/10 7:57 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
>>
>> > Once it *is* tested, does anybody know how to apply the
>> > patch? I see a "download raw patch set", but we should obviously keep
>> > David's n
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 07:06:57PM +0200, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 20. April 2010 18:05:13 schrieb Graham Percival:
> > On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 08:10:15AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> > > git apply downloaded-patch
> > > git commit -a --author="David A. Kastrup "
> >
> > Ick. I c
Am Dienstag, 20. April 2010 18:05:13 schrieb Graham Percival:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 08:10:15AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
> > On 4/20/10 7:57 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> > > Once it *is* tested, does anybody know how to apply the
> > > patch? I see a "download raw patch set", but we shoul
On 4/20/10 10:50 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:34:37AM +0200, Francisco Vila wrote:
>> Hello. I guess this means I have to upgrade my compiler or something.
>
> If anything, it would be makeinfo, not your compiler. But I think
> the problem is that I didn't update
2010/4/20 Graham Percival :
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:34:37AM +0200, Francisco Vila wrote:
>> Hello. I guess this means I have to upgrade my compiler or something.
>
> If anything, it would be makeinfo, not your compiler. But I think
> the problem is that I didn't update the @direntries in
> li
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 10:34:37AM +0200, Francisco Vila wrote:
> Hello. I guess this means I have to upgrade my compiler or something.
If anything, it would be makeinfo, not your compiler. But I think
the problem is that I didn't update the @direntries in
lilypond-web when renaming manuals. Whi
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 06:31:11PM +0200, Reinhold Kainhofer wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 20. April 2010 18:07:50 schrieb Graham Percival:
> > I think we'll remove it in lilypond 3.0, as part of the GLISS
> > changes. Granted, this is probably 18 months in the future.
>
> Hmm, with such a time horizon,
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Dienstag, 20. April 2010 18:07:50 schrieb Graham Percival:
> > And this back compatibility has no known downsides.
>
> It makes the lilypond-book code slightly more complicated? I
> agree that this isn't a big deal.
AFAICS, it's only the regexp t
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 04:06:50PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Graham Percival writes:
>
> > Well, you could add a @knownissues to the lilypond-book docs
> > mentioning the deprecated syntax.
>
> It's not really an issue that old files with a different syntax happen
> to continue to work.
I a
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 08:10:15AM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>
> On 4/20/10 7:57 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
>
> > Once it *is* tested, does anybody know how to apply the
> > patch? I see a "download raw patch set", but we should obviously keep
> > David's name and changelog entries. I feel
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 04:24:27PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> Carl Sorensen writes:
>
> > Then commit the changes with an author specification:
> >
> > git commit -a --author="David A. Kastrup "
>
> While I appreciate a good joke and Tolkien references, I'd strongly
> suggest using my proper
Carl Sorensen writes:
> Then commit the changes with an author specification:
>
> git commit -a --author="David A. Kastrup "
While I appreciate a good joke and Tolkien references, I'd strongly
suggest using my proper name and Email address for that purpose.
--
David Kastrup
On 4/20/10 7:57 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 2:19 PM, wrote:
>> http://codereview.appspot.com/813048/diff/5001/6001#newcode72
>> Documentation/changes.tely:72: @example
>> On 2010/04/20 13:02:15, Carl wrote:
>>>
>>> I think it would be better to show both the new a
On 4/20/10 7:57 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 2:19 PM, wrote:
>> http://codereview.appspot.com/813048/diff/5001/6001#newcode72
>> Documentation/changes.tely:72: @example
>> On 2010/04/20 13:02:15, Carl wrote:
>>>
>>> I think it would be better to show both the new a
Graham Percival writes:
> On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:14 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
>> It seems somewhat underhanded to just silently change all the example
>> files and docs, and just mention in the changelog that the old syntax
>> remains supported. But I don't see that talking more excessively
On 4/20/10 7:48 AM, "Graham Percival" wrote:
> Hi Carl,
>
> Could you do a make clean, then a make, followed by trying to compile this:
>
> \include "../lilypond/Documentation/included/font-table.ly"
> \markuplines \override-lines #'(word-space . 4)
> \doc-chars #shape-note-note
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 2:19 PM, wrote:
> http://codereview.appspot.com/813048/diff/5001/6001#newcode72
> Documentation/changes.tely:72: @example
> On 2010/04/20 13:02:15, Carl wrote:
>>
>> I think it would be better to show both the new and the old syntax in
>
> I had both versions first. But I
Il giorno lun, 19/04/2010 alle 19.54 +0100, Graham Percival ha scritto:
> It just occurred to me that providing an upgrade path would be
> very nice.
This could be handled by convert-ly, with an ordinary conversion rule,
or if anybody sees the requirement a rule that would be enabled only for
file
On Tue, Apr 20, 2010 at 12:14 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
> It seems somewhat underhanded to just silently change all the example
> files and docs, and just mention in the changelog that the old syntax
> remains supported. But I don't see that talking more excessively about
> the "old" syntax and it
Hi Carl,
Could you do a make clean, then a make, followed by trying to compile this:
\include "../lilypond/Documentation/included/font-table.ly"
\markuplines \override-lines #'(word-space . 4)
\doc-chars #shape-note-noteheads
I get a segfault; this is a slimmed-down version of the f
Reviewers: carl.d.sorensen_gmail.com,
Message:
Amended.
http://codereview.appspot.com/813048/diff/5001/6001
File Documentation/changes.tely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/813048/diff/5001/6001#newcode72
Documentation/changes.tely:72: @example
On 2010/04/20 13:02:15, Carl wrote:
I thin
LGTM.
Thanks for getting us in line with standards.
Carl
http://codereview.appspot.com/813048/diff/5001/6001
File Documentation/changes.tely (right):
http://codereview.appspot.com/813048/diff/5001/6001#newcode72
Documentation/changes.tely:72: @example
I think it would be better to show both t
Graham Percival writes:
> On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 12:42:17PM -0600, Carl Sorensen wrote:
>>
>> On 4/19/10 11:49 AM, "David Kastrup" wrote:
>>
>> >> - we definitely need a CHANGES entry for this syntax change.
>> >
>> > I don't know how to do this one.
>>
>> Simply put an entry in Documentati
Hello. I guess this means I have to upgrade my compiler or something.
Run on a fresh repo after a successful make all. Last lines of output
from make install are:
make[1]: Entering directory `/tmp/lilypond/Documentation'
cp -p contributor.texi out/contributor.texi
export LILYPOND_DATADIR=
export
25 matches
Mail list logo
